


Constructive 
Public 
Opinion 


F. A. VANDERLIP 


PRESIDENT THE NATIONAL City BANK 


OF NEW YORK 


ADDRESS BEFORE 
NEw JERSEY STATE 
CHAMBER OF COMMERCE 
NEWARK, N. J. ° 
JUNE 22, 1914 


Digitized by the Internet Archive 
in 2021 with funding from 
University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign Alternates 


https://archive.org/details/constructivepubl0Ovand 


An 7 aN 
Ka) ; 


Constructive Public Opinion 


There is special significance and promise in the 
character of this gathering. You have met as repre- 
sentatives of the many Chambers of Commerce or- 
ganized throughout this State. These associations of 
business men have of late grown so numerous that 
there is hardly a commercial town of any importance 
in the State that does not have its Chamber of Com- 
merce, forming a center for the exchange of com- 
mercial thought and a platform for the utterance of 
commercial opinion. 


The movement is significant in indicating, as 3t doce 
that. business men are coming to grasp the necessity 
for that kind of organization. ‘This meeting tonight, 
bringing together representatives of the Chambers, of 
Commerce throughout the State, is full of promise, 
for it indicates a recognition of the value of associa- 
tion among these organizations. It indicates .an 
understanding of the good which will come from an 
interchange of views, and of the added power which 
will result from concerted effort. | 


There is reason enough why business. men of this 
State, and why business men of the whole nation, 
should see the need for such organization. ‘There is 
necessity for the association of these business organi- 
zations into effectivs forums for the discussion of cur- 
rent affairs. There is need to band them together 
for the promulgation of unified views, that will help 
a right public opinion. I believe that business men 
are face to face with a peremptory necessity for tak- 
ing a deeper interest in political affairs. It is no 
longer a time for platitudes about discharging one’s 


3 


duties by going to the polls. There is a much larger 
duty of citizenship. The polls are merely the place 
of registering the conclusions of political thought. 


It is the duty of business men to think deeply 
enough upon these problems so that their conclusions 
will stand the test of open discussion. It is the obli- 
gation of business men to make effective political 
contributions, which will help to form a sound public 
opinion. 

Viewed in this larger sense, I believe that nearly 
everything that business men have to complain of in 
the political tendencies of the day can be _ pretty 
directly traced to their own neglect of their political 
duties. I believe that such neglect has brought us to 
a point of gravest danger, danger that involves the 
very foundations of the present order. That there 
should have been such neglect is not an unnatural 
thing.’ The conduct of business requires a high speci- 
lization, a more complete specilization today, with all 
its complexities and its keenness of competition, than 
it ever before required. Specialists, whether they be 
business specialists or specialists of other kinds, are 
apt to be so wrapped in their own environment that 
they are unable to generalize. They are obtuse 
regarding matters outside of their specialty and are 
unable to detect the course of the larger currents of 
affairs. 'That is one reason why business men are not 
more widely awake to the true significance of the drift 
of political currents. 


I firmly believe that if this nation is to avoid dis- 
aster, a general awakening is necessary. We must 
recognize the probable effect of present day political 
tendencies upon business, upon property and upon 
property rights, and upon the course of industrial and 
commercial development. I believe that currents are 
developing today that may quickly become irresistible 
forces, and that, too, forces of adversity and ill for- 
tune, if their dangers are not comprehended, their 
direction corrected, and their sources controlled. 


The stake which business men have in the outcome 


4 


is enormous. Great as it is, however, it is of no more 
concern to them, of no more import to the future 
happiness of their children, than it is to the condition 
and outlook of the humblest of workers. 


A. disaster to capital, a crippling and discourage- 
ment of directive ability, the disheartening of men of 
enterprise, will not have its effects confined to the 
class which you as delegates from the Chambers of 
Commerce represent. Its results will encompass the 
whole social body. There is no man so humble that 
his interest is not as great as yours in the outcome. 


Brooks Adams, whose pessimism I do not alto- 
gether share, has forcefully set forth in his “Theory 
of Social Revolutions” the thought which I have in 
mind. “Administration,” he says, “is the capacity of 
co-ordinating many, and often conflicting, social 
energies in a single organism, so adroitly that they 
shall operate as a unity. This pre-supposes the 
power of recognizing a series of relations between 
numerous special social interests, with all of which 
no single man can be intimately acquainted. Prob- 
ably no very highly specialized class can be strong in 
this intellectual quality because of the intellectual 
isolation incident to specialization; and yet adminis- 
tration or generalization is not only the faculty upon 
which social stability rests, but is, possibly, the high- 
est faculty of the human mind. It is precisely in this 
pre-eminent requisite for success in government that 
I suspect the modern capitalistic class to be weak. 
The scope of‘the human intellect is necessarily limited ; 
and modern capitalists appear to have been evolved 
under the stress of an environment which demanded 
excessive specialization in the direction of a genius 
adapted to money-making under highly complex in- 
dustrial conditions. To this money-making attribute 
all else has been sacrificed, and the modern capitalist 
not only thinks in terms of money, but he thinks in 
terms of money more exclusively than the French aris- 
tocrat or lawyer ever thought in terms of caste. 
* * * * As the capitalist is more highly special- 


. 


ized than the soldier ever was, he is more helpless when 
his single weapon fails him. * * * * Jt would 
seem to be almost mathematically demonstrable that 
the capitalist will in the near future be subjected to 
a pressure under which he must develop flexibility or 
be eliminated. * * * * Meditating upon these 
matters, it is hard to resist the persuasion that unless 
capital can, in the immediate future, generate an 
intellectual energy, beyond the sphere of its special- 
ized calling, very much in excess of any intellectual 
energy of which it has hitherto given promise, and 
unless it can besides rise to an appreciation of diverse 
social conditions, as well as to a level of political 
sagacity, far higher than it has attained within recent 
years, its relative power in the community must 
decline.” 


This is a brilliant portrayal of a depressing out- 
look. There may be too much pessimism mixed in 
the colors with which the picture is painted. Never- 
theless, it is a picture, the general outline of which 
the business men of this whole country are begin- 
ning dimly to see, and it is that recognition which 
makes it only too true that the main reasons for the 
present business depression are psychological. 

I wish there could be a clearer comprehension of 
what a disheartened business community really 
means; what it means to the whole people! If the 
directive forces of business life are to lose heart, if 
their courage for new enterprise is to ebb, if their 
willingness to take risk, to test the chances of the 
future, to venture present possession upon prospec- 
tive development, is to fail, then the psychology of 
the business mind becomes a matter of the gravest 
import. 


One may well stop to ask if anything resembling 
such a state of mind really exists, and, if it does exist, 
is there any substantial foundation for it? A large 
part of the business world is pessimistic; yet there is 
much in the situation that would seem to make pessi- 
mism unwarranted. Nature is smiling as_ rarely 


6 


before, and holding out hands overflowing with 
plenty. The banking situation is peculiarly free 
from the results of errors of judgment, and nearly 
every community in the country has the advantage 
of an easy money market and a sound credit situa- 
tion. We have had no blows from any extraordinary 
disaster. At many points, the statistical data of busi- 
ness shows that it is still in large volume; in some 
important particulars figures could be adduced that 
have rarely been exceeded. 


In the face of such conditions, it may well be 
asked, are there just grounds for apprehension. Are 
the dangers that some of us think we see merely 
phantoms; have we minds so inflexibily bound to tra- 
dition, to the old order, that we cannot grasp the sig- 
nificance, or the beneficence, of change? Do we, 
therefore, perforce find in prospective changes pros- 
pective disasters, while, in fact, our apprehensions 
have no substantial existence? Are industries run- 
ning on half time merely examples of unrealized 
fears; are the many illustrations'of industrial distress 
that might be cited, of urgent need for financing that 
it is difficult to do, of new enterprise abandoned, of 
old enterprise left with plans for expansion grown 
cold, only the result of a blind and stiff-necked adhe- 
sion to the old order, of an inability to conform to new 
conditions, to new social and political ideals? — 


We seem to be without leaders wise enough to 
answer such questions so that their conclusions will 
convert those holding opposite views. ‘Thus we have 
many conflicting opinions. For myself, I can only 
say that the political current upon which we are now 
beginning to travel with tremendous speed, seems to 
me liable to land us in a thorough-going disorganiza- 
tion of business and industrial life. Those currents 
may be engendered and guided by forces partially 
sincere and honest, but only partially, and even when 
those forces are sincere and honest, they are fre- 
quently ill informed as to facts and lacking in sound 
understanding of great economic principles. 


i 


In legislation there is a disposition to throw experi- 
ence to the winds. We seem to have a new concep- 
tion of the functions of government; of what legis- 
lation may be expected to accomplish. Indeed, we 
have gotten far away from the conception of the 
fathers of our government in our views regarding the 
relative balance of its three co-ordinate branches. 


It has been well said, not by a business man, but by 
a distinguished historian, that, “Where Jefferson 
looked upon government as a negative force which 
would be more useful the less it interfered with the 
life of the individual, the present tendency is to insist 
upon the positive, directive, formative influence the 
State may exert upon the lives of its citizens. We are 
agitating for corrective and regulative legislation on 
every conceivable subject from the public health and 
the public morals to the hours of labor and the mini- 
mum wage. The assistance of the community is to 
be invoked to settle all the perplexed issues between 
individuals or between groups of individuals. Gradu- 
ally, too, we find the authority of the central govern- 
ment gaining in the public estimation and believed 
to possess more adequate powers and to be _ better 
able than State or City to deal efficiently and 
promptly with most problems. The great increase of 
governmental authority, which the era of regulation 
demands, will apparently accrue almost entirely to 
the Federal Government, to the exclusion of State 
and local governments. And it will, furthermore, 
break another precedent of democracy and accrue to 
the executive rather than to the legislative.” 


This seems to me a clear exposition of a most sig- 
nificant phase of our political life. 


A distinguished member of the United States 
Senate, that once “greatest deliberative body in the 
world,” a few days ago impressively made this state- 
ment: “Every step of human progress is the aban- 
donment or condemnation of that which went before!’ 
There is the keynote of much of our loose political 
thinking—‘‘Every step of human progress is the 


8 


abandonment or condemnation ot that which went 
before.” 


The man who holds that view, the political party 
that legislates in the light of that pronouncement, 
must believe that what is is bad; that in novelty, in 
untried experiment, in new theory and in newer prac- 
tice alone lie those measures of government that will 
be beneficial. So we have a legislative restlessness 
that is unparalled, a searching for novelty that results 
in as startling productions, viewed in the light of 
anything known before, as has been reached in Art 
by the schools of Cubism and Futurism. To the 
sober-minded, somewhat unimaginative, hard-work- 
ing business man, to the man whose life has been a 
career dealing with facts, facts as they are, some of 
our recent legislative proposals are no more intelli- 
gible than that famous composition, which bore the 
title, “A Nude Descending a Stair Case.” I admit 
there may be something of truth in some of the newer 
forms of Art, although I have never reached a point 
where Cubism is more than a huge joke, if it is 
not the work of a degenerated intellect. I can under- 
stand that a picture need not necessarily be a photo- 
graphic reproduction of a fact. I am quite sure the 
great school of Impressionism has added somethmg 
of permanent value to the Art of the world. Carry- 
ing the parallel into politics, I believe we should not 
be so bound to old forms as to close our minds to the 
consideration of new theories. We may well admit 
that there is a sound basis of economic facts back of 
many of the demands for novel legislation. Industry 
is in a novel situation. The changes wrought in our 
lifetime by new forms of power, of transportation, of 
communication, are revolutionary. Even greater 
have been the changes wrought by corporations. Let 
us, too, admit that the direction of these new forces 
have not always rested in the hands of men of great 
breadth of vision. Sometimes they have not been 
in the hands of men of honesty of purpose. All this, 
I believe, gives basis to a demand for what amounts 


9 


almost to a new code of business ethics, and for sta- 
tutes that will support such a code. But while admit- 
ting all of that, we should see that those facts are no 
warrant for giving unlimited legislative freedom to 
groups of political Cubists and Futurists who do not 
comprehend principles, who do not know history, and 
who will be guided neither by experience, nor by com- 
mon sense. ‘lo make a specific application of what 
I mean, let us consider the present legislative situa- 
tion. Let us weigh what it would mean to current 
legislative proposals if we had a sound and well- 
informed public opinion, and if that public opinion 
was so crystallized that legislative and executive 
powers would be forced clearly to recognize it. 


No previous Congress has enacted so much legisla- 
tion of immediate, novel and fundamental importance 
in its relation to business as has the present Congress. 
Now, with its first regular session still uncompleted, 
it has in hand further measures of still more far- 
reaching importance, representing still more novel 
theories of governmental supervision. We find this 
active Congress proposing additional legislation 
which promises to create between business and goy- 
erninent a relationship entirely new, which must pro- 
ceed along paths heretofore unexplored. 


Not only are the proposals in the pending legis- 
lation novel in their application to business, 
but there is another point of dissimilarity between 
these measures and any that we have had _ before. 
They are being discussed and in all probability will 
be passed by a Congress, a large majority of which 
is not in favor of passing them at the present time, 
and they will be added to the laws of a nation a large 
majority of whose citizens are not in favor of such 
laws being enacted at the present time. I am aware 
that these are sweeping statements. I am aware too 
that, even though the honesty of my opinion may not 
be challenged, the correctness of my information 
might be. It may well be said that although my busi- 
ness relations cover, with a good deal of intimacy, the 


10 


entire country, and while I have a rather extraordin- 
ary opportunity for obtaining the views of men from 
every section, the opinions which come to me may 
be highly colored by prejudice; they may come from 
a single class, and they may fail entirely to repre- 
sent the true situation. I am not unmindful of all 
that, but I believe I have made full allowance for 
such probability in testing the information that 
reaches me, and after doing that I still unhesitatingly 
say that a majority of the people of this country are 
not behind Congress demanding the enactment of the 
further business legislation now proposed. 


As to the statement that a majority of Congress 
itself is not favorable to the passage of these measures 
at the present time, I can say that I have personally 
talked with many of the leaders, including the leaders 
on the administration side, and they have told me 
unequivocally that a majority of both Houses would 
prefer to give the country a period of legislative 
peace and end the present session without further 
enactments. 


I believe there is not a newspaper correspondent 
in Washington, familiar with the views of many indi- 
vidual Members of Congress, who will not verify that 
statement. 


It has been charged that there is an effort to manu- 
facture sentiment and in turn to have that sentiment 
impressed upon Congress by a chain of letter-writers, 
and the endeavor has been termed a conspiracy. I 
can tell you that I know of cases where Democratic 
Congressmen have written to their constituents beg- 
ging them in turn to write to the President and 
endeavor to influence him to permit Congress to 
adjourn this session without further legislation affect- 
ing business. I do not regard this action on the part 
of Congressmen as a conspiracy, but rather an effort 
to bring out a true reflection of public opinion. 


Let us consider for a moment how these measures, 
of vast import as they are to the business of this 


He 


nation, and, therefore, to the hfe of every citizen, 
whether business man or not, are being handled by 
Congress. There is no well crystalized sentiment 
there as to their form. The House has passed one 
measure of the first order of importance under a cau- 
cus whip and with closure of debate, openly expect- 
ing the Senate to revise it into reasonable form. Is it 
not probable that under the pressure of great desire 
to end the session, with hazy ideas of just what legis- 
lation they wish, and working in a field of practically 
untried experiment, with debate discouraged and 
legislative hearings cut short, the finished product 
will fail of its purpose? 


Patrick Henry once said: “In proportion to the 
magnitude of the subject ought to be the freedom of 
the debate.” Surely the magnitude of the subject is 
great enough to warrant ‘giving time to every Mem- 
ber of Congress to express his matured and deliberate 
opinion concerning both the principles involved in this 
legislation, and the exact verbal form such novel 
enactments should take. 


But of even more importance than time for discus- 
sion, 1s assurance of freedom to register individual 
judgment, uncoaxed by patronage or unthreatened 
by power. 


I will agree with the most progressive of politicians 
that changed times and conditions warrant changed 
statutes, but I still believe that when these statutes 
are intended to create a fundamentally new relation- 
ship between business and government, when they are 
designed to furnish novel curbs upon the freedom of 
commerce, they should have back of them a clear and 
certain opinion of a majority of Congress and of the 
citizens of the country. 


You may say that I ask for delay merely in the 
hope of gaining avoidance; that finding proposed 
measures distasteful and being powerless to defeat 
them, naturally the next step is to delay their enact- 
ment; and you may ask what good can be expected 


Ve 


from mere delay, if it is admitted that new condi- 
tions now make desirable new laws. 


The proposal that I would like to see Congress 
agree to is this: I would by no means ask that Con- 
gress merely stop its legislative work because its 
members are weary, or because they hear domestic 
or political calls that are with great force attracting 
them homeward; I would ask that the two Houses 
go forward now with a full discussion of these several 
important legislative projects; that they permit free 
debate, and that they gather such information from 
hearings as they may feel will help them toward wise 
conclusions; that they finally, at as early a date as 
they can, agree upon the exact and specific form 
which these measures are to take on the statute books, 
and then, without enacting them definitely into law, 
that they go home and give the country three months’ 
time in which to study their completed work. Give 
the voters three months’ time in which to familiarize 
themselves with the exact terms of the law which 
Congress proposes to enact, give themselves three 
months’ time in which to feel the reflection of public 
opinion, and if after that they are so minded, let them 
return to Washington and enact these measures into 
law. 


I would rest perfectly contented under such an 
arrangement. 


I would not ask for a referendum to prove whether 
or not a majority of the voters actually want this 
legislation, which at present I doubt; I would only 
ask that citizens have an opportunity, for a_ brief 
ninety days, to study in its final form such important 
legislation as is proposed. I would ask that business 
men have this opportunity to discuss this legislation, 
which so vitally concerns not only their interests, but 
the interests of the whole country and of all the 
people for years to come. Is it too much to ask that 
with such a grave responsibility resting upon legisla- 
tors that they permit, and not only permit but seek, 


13 


such an analysis of their proposed acts and such a 
crystalization of sound opinion in regard to them? 

We have gone through many years without this 
legislation; a delay of ninety days would not be fatal 
to the hope for beneficence from its effect. 


A year ago we were told that the pending banking 
legislation had to be enacted at the special session. 
Failing that, there was finally brought to bear the 
greatest executive pressure to make it a law before 
the Christmas holidays. It is still unoperative, but 
the country is in no financial turmoil as a result. The 
chief executive took nearly six months to select the 
Board which is to be responsible for its administra- 
tion, and considering the admirable character of the 
selections made, the time may have been well spent. 


It was on October 14th, 1918, that the Eastern 
roads made an application to the Interstate Com- 
merce Commission. for advance in rates. That body 
has felt that it was wise to take the months that have 
intervened for considering the matter, and has not 
yet made public its decision, although the general 
subject has been under consideration by them since 
the roads made application in 1910. 


Why cannot we, therefore, have a little patience, 
however strong our belief may be in the desirability 
of this pending legislation? Why ought we not to 
give the country time to study it in its specific and 
definite form, before it is finally engraved upon the 
tablets ? 


If such a course were adopted, however, it is easy 


to see how important it would be that the public 


opinion which weighed these measures, should be 
informed, right-minded, constructive. My only fear, 
were such a course taken with pending legislation, 
would be that through the neglect by business men of 
their duty in helping create a well informed public 
opinion, the reaction I anticipate might be delayed. 

I have tried to give some hint of how important I 
believe it is that business men at the present time 


14 


ae 


should take a wider interest in political affairs. I 
have no serious criticism of Congress. My criticism 
goes back of that to the constituency—back to a pub- 
lic opinion which I believe is not well informed, which 
does not fully grasp the force of great economic prin: 
ciples that are more potent than any laws that Con- 
gress can enact. 


You have your full share of blame if public opinion 
is 1] informed. As a class, you have been silent in 
the face of calumny. Gross misstatements in regard 
to business methods and aims of business men have 
gained credit by being confidently repeated and 
rarely or never answered. An important part of the 
public holds resentment against business men because 
of the accumulation of the charges of misconduct that 
have been made and gone unanswered; because of the 
distorted pictures of your aims and methods which 
have gone unchallenged. 


It seems to me time if business men are men of 
honor that they stand up and fight for their honor. 
You do not need to be told that in large part the 
motive back of the drudgery of business life is a mo- 


tive, not of gain, but of accomplishment, an idealism 


as pure and clear as any statesman can boast of; but 
the general public does not know that, and will not 
believe it, while men bend cravenly to their tasks and 
never look up to answer detraction, misrepresenta- 
tion and slander. 


For the comparatively rare examlpes of greed, of 
blindness to social obligations, of unfairness, and even 
of dishonesty, we have all been made to suffer, because 
in the main we have silently submitted to generaliza- 
tions drawn from these comparatively rare examples. 


Now, it is useless to complain about a condition, 
unless one can suggest a remedy. Fortunately, it 
seems to me, the remedy lies directly in our own hands. 


I have tried to indicate how important it is to the 
future of business that we now have a background of 


15 


sound and well-informed public opinion against which 
the new legislation which we need and are certainly 
going to have may stand out and be tested. 


I can hardly over-emphasize how important I 
believe that is to the business in which everyone of you 
is engaged. With this in mind, you will not be surpris- 
ed if I tell you that I believe the time has come when 
we should see made the most gigantic contributions 
that were ever made by business men to a_ political 
campaign. I do not care to which party the contribu- 
tions are made, for the contributions that must be 
made, if you are to do anything that is effective, will 
not be contributions of money—they will be contribu- 
tions of service; contributions of experience, of under- 
standing, of truth; contributions in the way of an ef- 
fective demand that the men whom you select as your 
representatives shall freely exercise their judgment, 
and contributions in the way of watchfulness that 
shall insure both honesty and intelligence in the exer- 
cise of representative obligations. 


Now, all that is very well as a generalization; but 
we need something more specific, and I believe you 
have in the nature of this gathering the germ of 
specific action. 


Let me make one more historical reference, and this 
time go back of the date of the foundation of the 
nation, and to those days when a public opinion was 
just beginning to form, which made our independence 
possible. There were a few men who saw clearly. 
The enactment of obnoxious laws had set many people 
“thinking with the eagerness and uneasiness of those 
who seek by some means to defend their liberties.” 
James Otis, with his impressive eloquence, had said 
that he spoke in the name of three thousand freemen 
“who counted upon being heard;” but in truth there 
was no solidarity of opinion, no united front to pres- 
ent an irresistible resistance. ‘The colonies were scat- 
tered. Courage was not always equal to putting 
patriotism above immediate material well-being. 
There were “darkeners of counsel” and the need of 


16 


* 


the day was for something that would unify public 
sentiment. ‘The proposal that accomplished that, 
came from Samuel Adams, when he suggested that in 
every commonwealth, in every colony, there be or- 
ganized Committees of Correspondence. “If our 
design for these committees succeeds,” he said, “there 
will be an apparent union of sentiments among the 
people of this province which may spread throughout 
the continent.” ‘The idea of the organization of these 
committees was popular; the members were indefatig- 
able in their work. The result was the forming of a 
unified public opinion upon which was built the inde- 
pendence of America. 


Is there not here an idea that we could adopt today, 
and is there not in this gathering the illustration of 
how todo it? Let our Committees of Correspondence 
be the Chambers of Commerce of the United States. 
Let us unite them in the work of creating an informed 
and sound public opinion. Let the work of doing 
that be parceled out with the genius that you who 
know the value of organization, of co-operation, of the 
subdivision of labor, in the management of your own 
affairs, have proved you possess. See that the wisest 
and ablest men of your community are placed in the 
executive positions of your organizations. Make of 
yourselves such earnest and able lieutenants that the 
detail of organization may be complete and effective. 
Understand fully that this means self-sacrificing serv- 
ice; that it means an expenditure of time, and that it 
means constant, co-operative effort. 


Through your organizations, see to it that every 
misstatement of fact, whether made in Congress, in 
the press, or in any public utterance, is challenged. 
Let men understand that loose statement, that mis- 
statement, can no longer go carelessly on. Have 
every page of the Congressional Record read and 
every time a misstatement is printed there challenge 
the man who made it; challenge him so publicly that 
an answer will overtake a he. If a man is a dema- 
gogue, if he clothes half-truths in language that 


Ly, 


appeals to prejudice, go into his district and answer 
and expose him. If a newspaper is ill-informed, see 
to it first that it has every facility for correct informa- 
tion, and then if it is still unfair, publish its unfairness 
in a way which will make unfairness unprofitable, and 
you will have no more of it. 


I do not need to elaborate this idea. You are all 
too familiar with what organization can do to need 
more than a suggestion. But I know that some of 
you will answer that your lives have not been lived in 
the forum; that you cannot write; that you have not 
the power of speech so developed that you could with 
success publicly defend your views. In that I believe 
you are wrong. You do not know your latent powers. 
You can do it. You must do it. You need no tricks 
of rhetoric, no magic of eloquence. Just a plain, clear 
understanding of facts and principles, and a frank 
exposition of them. 


You may think that the contribution that I am ask- 
ing is more difficult to give than have been other con- 
tributions that you have been more frequently asked 
to make, but I tell you the satisfaction of such con- 
tributions, and the effectiveness of them will so far 
transcend anything you have ever done before in the 
way of participation in politics that you will find the 
blessedness of the wise giver is yours. 


Such, then, is the appeal I would make for creating 
a constructive public opinion. The effort should 
include frankness to the public as to your own affairs, 
an appreciation of conditions outside of your own 
personal relationships, an active participation in poli- 
tical life that begins far back of the polls, begins at 
the beginning of the formation of public opinion— 
of that public opinion of which the result at the polls 
is only the final reflection—and I would ask that not 
only of the individual, but I would ask it of associa- 
tions of individuals and the thorough co-operation of 
such associations in the work that is to be done. 


I would see that there is banded together for effec- 
18 


a 


tive, militant work, not alone every business man, but 
every citizen who could be induced to join these 
organizations. I would make special effort to bring 
into co-operative relationship those men who more 
than you are interested in prosperity, although their 
relation to it may be in the humblest capacity of labor- 
ers in those industries that you help to direct. I would 
especially invite representatives of labor organizations 
into your councils. I would ask newspaper writers 
and editors to join in your deliberations, in order that 
through the free exposition of your views and a free 
giving of information in regard to your acts and 
affairs these writers and editors may be in a better 
position to give facts to the public. Your organiza- 
tions should be Bureaus of Facts. There must also 
be a national co-ordination of the work of these organi- 
zations—a national clearing house, a national execu- 
tive committee. By making use of the organizations 
and facilities which we already have and by giving 
to them thought and effort in unstinted measure, the 
work can be carried on with undoubted success. 


But if the work is to be effectively done, you must 
yourselves make the contribution of service. You can- 
not delegate the work. Do not try the plan of hiring 
others to promulgate your views. You cannot dis- 
charge your duty by writing checks. Band yourselves 
together, first in small associations, and then see that 
these associations are united in a common effort to 
impress upon the country those views which are the 
best results of your experience, your Judgment, your 
sympathy, and your righteousness. 


Band yourselves together to make an appeal to the 
common sense of the people. That will not be con- 
spiracy. Seek by your united efforts to build a pub- 
lic opinion that will promote the safety and happiness 
of posterity. Do not think only in days or in weeks, 
but think in decades. Realize the responsibility which 
is yours to turn present forces in right channels. 
Realize that patriotism means a submergence of self- 
interest. By a submergence of self-interest alone can 


ie 


VOMIT 
3 33902 J 


0112 0621 


you help to form a public opinion that will permit the 
creative genius of business to be recognized at its true 
worth, and thus give to that genius the position it 
should rightly have—a place where it will be above 
adverse criticism. 

Such a course of action will create a public opinion 
that will be constructive, and not as now destructive, 
of the best sort of business activity. If you will do 
this, if all of us will unite to create such a movement, 
there need be little fear for the ultimate solution of 
our problems, nor for the permanence of our pros- 
perity and the pre-eminence of our country. 


20 





